On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 1:03 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 12:02 AM, Robert Haas wrote:
>> I'm just going to remove the useless assertion for now. What you're
>> proposing here may (or may not) be worth doing, but it carries a
>> non-zero risk of breaking something somewhere, if anyone is relying on
>> the signed-ness of that type. Removing the assertion is definitely
>> safe.
>
> Fine for me. That's indeed possible for an extension.
Btw, I think that your commit message should have given some credit to
Coverity for finding the problem. Not a big deal though.
--
Michael
